MEDIUM IN COURT
EVIDENCE IN TRANCE GIVES DETAILS OF BURGLARY STRANGE GERMAN EXPERIMENT UNPRECEDENTED in judicial history is an experiment in court, carried out at the trial, at Insterburg, in East Prussia, of a woman charged with “fraudulently practising as a medium,” writes “The Daily Chronicle’s” Berlin correspondent.
In the presence of experts on hypnotism, telepathy and occult sciences, this elderly white-haired wife of the head of an agricultural school was tested as to the gift with which she claims to be endowed. By auto-suggestion she passed into a trance, and was then asked to detail an unsolved crime mystery—a robbery in a lonely castle—of which she had no previous knowledge. It was a burglary committed last February at a Schloss on a remote Prussian estate that the trancewoman was asked to describe wcile “self-hypnotised” in court. Strict precautions had been taken to verify that the "clairvoyant” woman had no prior knowledge of the castle crime. Dramatic Dialogue Subsequent examination of the evidence disclosed that, though there were minor errors in the account given by the woman while in the trance, it corresponded with the facts. Experiments began with the woman sitting on a chair in the centre of the i ourt and holding a match-stick in her . hand. After about three minutes her head sank backwards, and she passed into a condition which doctors in court described as “undoubtedly one of a self-suggested hypnotic trance.” Then there came to her side a forester (the only person in court familiar with the crime in question), and a well-known Viennese specialist, l>r. Thoma, who had been summoned from Austria to assist the court.. She was told that a theft had been committed; and then the crime was described in a dramatic dialogue between the forester and the medium las the woman had now become), it ran as follows: Forester: When did this happen? Medium: Last February. Forester: Where was it? Medium: In a big building. Forester: What do you see? Medium: Silver objects gleaming. Forester: Where are you now? •Medium: You are taking me into a large room. There are big carven chairs. Forester: How old is the owner of the castle? Medium: Nearly 70. Forester: No, older? Medium: Yes. Nearly 80. But he is very elastic in his movements, and 1 see him riding. Forester: What else was stolen? Medium: Material of some kind. I cannot see it clearly. Where are you taking me? Forester: What does this material look like? Medium; I see now; it is fur. Forester: What else did the thief do ? Medium: He sat in the room, ate some meat and drank something. Forester: Ho you see any other object that he held? Medium: Yes. It is lying on the window-sill. It is a pistol. Test for Unknown Names Dr. Thoma then took up the examination and asked the woman if she could name the thief. She hesitated a few seconds, murmured something indistinctly; and was then given a pencil and piece of paper and asked if she could write the name. This she did—that is to say, she wrote a name. There followed a similar test as to the name of the owner of the castle, and the medium answered that there were two sylla-bles in the name, and she appeared to be trying to say them but without success. Again she was given pencil and paper, and, with her eyes closed, she wrote “Von Reibnitz.” She was then awakened from the trance, and, once more in a normal condition, smiled at the court, rose from the chair, and went back to her place in the dock A 8 compared with the woman’s “reconstruction,” the circumstances of ".he theft, so far as they are known, show an amazing correspondence. The owner of the castle is Herr von Reibnitz. He is 89 years of age. He rides daily.
The articles stolen were a fur coat and 12 silver coins. The thief had eaten the remains of a sausage and drank wine. He left a revolver behind. Enormous interest and a lively discussion have followed this strange experiment in a court of law, but commentators are shy of jumping to any conclusions. It Is pointed out that the crucial test is the identity of the thief. He has not been traced, and even if the name written by the medium is the correct one, he is hardly likely to come forward and testify to her powers as a clairvoyant! Telepathy is advanced as one explanation of the success of the experiment. Frau Guenther-Gessers, the accused woman, has already been tried on the same charges in the lower court, which dismissed the case. This trial is taking place on the appeal of the Public Prosecutor of the province. She disavows any occult gifts, claiming only Intense powers of visualising places and persons. Her clients have actually included official detectives who have gone to her for help in their Investigations; and none of the witnesses so far subpoenaed by the prosecution has complained of feeling defrauded or deceived. One interesting point jurists make is that people she names as thieves are in danger of achieving that reputation even though they be immocent. It is also revealed that arrests have actually been made on different; occasions on the strength of statements the medium has made while in a state of trance.
Permanent link to this item
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/SUNAK19280707.2.104
Bibliographic details
Sun (Auckland), Volume II, Issue 400, 7 July 1928, Page 10
Word Count
891MEDIUM IN COURT Sun (Auckland), Volume II, Issue 400, 7 July 1928, Page 10
Using This Item
Stuff Ltd is the copyright owner for the Sun (Auckland). You can reproduce in-copyright material from this newspaper for non-commercial use under a Creative Commons BY-NC-SA 3.0 New Zealand licence. This newspaper is not available for commercial use without the consent of Stuff Ltd. For advice on reproduction of out-of-copyright material from this newspaper, please refer to the Copyright guide.